IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

The chilling trade effects of antidumping proliferation

  • Hylke Vandenbussche
  • Maurizio Zanardi

Advocates of antidumping (AD) laws downplay their negative effects by arguing that the trade flows that are subject to AD are small and their distortions negligible. But while the adverse effect of AD on product-level trade has long been established, the question remains whether there are trade effects at the aggregate level. The recent proliferation wave of AD laws and their use provides us with a unique policy change to estimate the true trade effects of adopting and enforcing AD laws. For this purpose, we estimate the effect of AD on bilateral trade flows between the "new adopters" of AD laws and their trade partners. Using a gravity model of annual observations (1980-2000) our estimates show that AD has trade chilling effects on aggregate import volumes but the impacts are heterogeneous across sectors. We find that new tough users experience a chilling of their aggregate imports of 14 billion US$ a year (or 5.9%) as a result of AD measures. For some countries like Mexico and India, the dampening effects of AD laws on trade flows are found to substantially offset the increase in trade volumes derived from trade liberalization. © 2010 Elsevier B.V.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: https://dipot.ulb.ac.be/dspace/bitstream/2013/136355/1/Elsevier_119049.pdf
File Function: Elsevier_119049
Download Restriction: only accessible to specific communities

As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

Paper provided by ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles in its series ULB Institutional Repository with number 2013/136355.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: 2010
Date of revision:
Publication status: Published in: European economic review (2010) v.54 n° 6,p.760-777
Handle: RePEc:ulb:ulbeco:2013/136355
Note: SCOPUS: ar.j
Contact details of provider: Postal: CP135, 50, avenue F.D. Roosevelt, 1050 Bruxelles
Web page: http://difusion.ulb.ac.be

More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Rubinstein, Yona & Helpman, Elhanan & Melitz, Marc, 2008. "Estimating Trade Flows: Trading Partners and Trading Volumes," Scholarly Articles 3228230, Harvard University Department of Economics.
  2. VEUGELERS, Reinhilde & VANDENBUSSCHE, Hylke, 1997. "European anti-dumping policy and the profitability of national and international collusion," SESO Working Papers 1997005, University of Antwerp, Faculty of Applied Economics.
  3. Robert M. Feinberg & Kara M. Olson, 2005. "Tariff Liberalization and Increased Administrative Protection: Is There a Quid Pro Quo?," International Trade 0501001, EconWPA.
  4. Thomas Prusa & Susan Skeath, 2002. "The economic and strategic motives for antidumping filings," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer, vol. 138(3), pages 389-413, September.
  5. Anne-Célia Disdier & Keith Head, 2008. "The Puzzling Persistence of the Distance Effect on Bilateral Trade," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 90(1), pages 37-48, February.
  6. Thomas J. Prusa, 1996. "The Trade Effects of U.S. Antidumping Actions," NBER Working Papers 5440, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  7. Staiger, Robert W. & Wolak, Frank A., 1992. "The effect of domestic antidumping law in the presence of foreign monopoly," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(3-4), pages 265-287, May.
  8. Michael Moore & Maurizio Zanardi, 2011. "Trade Liberalization and Antidumping: Is There a Substitution Effect?," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/136352, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  9. André Sapir & Henrik H. Horn & Petros Mavroidis, 2009. "Beyond the WTO ?An Anatomy of EU and US Preferential Trade Agreements," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/174283, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  10. James E. Anderson & Eric van Wincoop, 2003. "Gravity with Gravitas: A Solution to the Border Puzzle," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(1), pages 170-192, March.
  11. Krupp, Corinne M. & Skeath, Susan, 2002. "Evidence on the upstream and downstream impacts of antidumping cases," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 13(2), pages 163-178, August.
  12. Joao Santos Silva & Silvana Tenreyro, 2005. "The log of gravity," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 3744, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
  13. Michael Owen Moore & Maurizio Zanardi, 2008. "Does Antidumping Use Contribute to Trade Liberalization in Developing Countries," Working Papers 2008-01, The George Washington University, Institute for International Economic Policy.
  14. Hylke Vandenbussche & Maurizio Zanardi, 2008. "What explains the proliferation of antidumping laws," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/9819, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  15. Bown, Chad P., 2009. "The global resort to antidumping, safeguards, and other trade remedies amidst the economic crisis," Policy Research Working Paper Series 5051, The World Bank.
  16. Bergstrand, Jeffrey H, 1985. "The Gravity Equation in International Trade: Some Microeconomic Foundations and Empirical Evidence," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 67(3), pages 474-81, August.
  17. Douglas Staiger & James H. Stock, 1994. "Instrumental Variables Regression with Weak Instruments," NBER Technical Working Papers 0151, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  18. Bruce A. Blonigen, 2004. "Working the System: Firm Learning and the Antidumping Process," NBER Working Papers 10783, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  19. Bagwell,K. & Staiger,R.W., 1998. "An economic theory of GATT," Working papers 15, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
  20. Peter Egger & Douglas Nelson, 2011. "How Bad Is Antidumping? Evidence from Panel Data," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 93(4), pages 1374-1390, November.
  21. repec:att:wimass:9413 is not listed on IDEAS
  22. Bown, Chad P. & Crowley, Meredith A., 2007. "Trade deflection and trade depression," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 176-201, May.
  23. Axel Dreher, 2006. "Does globalization affect growth? Evidence from a new index of globalization," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(10), pages 1091-1110.
  24. Maurizio Zanardi, 2004. "Anti-dumping: What are the Numbers to Discuss at Doha?," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 403-433, 03.
  25. Arvind Subramanian & Shang-Jin Wei, 2003. "The WTO Promotes Trade, Strongly But Unevenly," NBER Working Papers 10024, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  26. Andrew K. Rose, 2002. "Do We Really KNow that the WTO Increases Trade?," Working Papers 182002, Hong Kong Institute for Monetary Research.
  27. Robert W. Staiger & Frank A. Wolak, 1994. "Measuring Industry Specific Protection: Antidumping in the United States," NBER Working Papers 4696, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  28. Blonigen, Bruce A., 2002. "Tariff-jumping antidumping duties," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 31-49, June.
  29. Jozef Konings & Hylke Vandenbussche & Linda Springael, 2001. "Import Diversion under European Antidumping Policy," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 1(3), pages 283-299, September.
  30. Arvind Subramanian & Gunnar Jonsson, 2000. "Dynamic Gains From Trade; Evidence From South Africa," IMF Working Papers 00/45, International Monetary Fund.
  31. Baier, Scott L. & Bergstrand, Jeffrey H., 2004. "Economic determinants of free trade agreements," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 64(1), pages 29-63, October.
  32. Maurizio Zanardi, 2004. "Antidumping law as a collusive device," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/9833, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
  33. Prusa, Thomas J., 1992. "Why are so many antidumping petitions withdrawn?," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1-2), pages 1-20, August.
  34. Liu, Meng-chun, 2002. "Determinants of Taiwan's Trade Liberalization: The Case of a Newly Industrialized Country," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 975-989, June.
  35. Scott L. Baier & Jeffrey H. Bergstrand, 2005. "Do free trade agreements actually increase members’ international trade?," Working Paper 2005-03, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.
  36. Bown, Chad P. & Tovar, Patricia, 2011. "Trade liberalization, antidumping, and safeguards: Evidence from India's tariff reform," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(1), pages 115-125, September.
  37. Sourafel Girma & David Greenaway & Katherine Wakelin, 2002. "Does antidumping stimulate FDI? Evidence from Japanese firms in the UK," Review of World Economics (Weltwirtschaftliches Archiv), Springer, vol. 138(3), pages 414-436, September.
  38. Haaland, Jan I. & Wooton, Ian, 1995. "Reciprocal Anti-Dumping and the Location of Firms," CEPR Discussion Papers 1272, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  39. James Devault, 1996. "The welfare effects of U.S. antidumping duties," Open Economies Review, Springer, vol. 7(1), pages 19-33, January.
  40. Barry Eichengreen & Douglas A. Irwin, 1998. "The Role of History in Bilateral Trade Flows," NBER Chapters, in: The Regionalization of the World Economy, pages 33-62 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  41. Bagwell, Kyle & Staiger, Robert W, 1990. "A Theory of Managed Trade," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(4), pages 779-95, September.
  42. Gwartney, James & Lawson, Robert, 2003. "The concept and measurement of economic freedom," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 405-430, September.
  43. Reitzes, James D, 1993. "Antidumping Policy," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 34(4), pages 745-63, November.
  44. Robert M. Feinberg & Seth Kaplan, 1993. "Fishing Downstream: The Political Economy of Effective Administered Protection," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 26(1), pages 150-58, February.
  45. Gallaway, Michael P. & Blonigen, Bruce A. & Flynn, Joseph E., 1999. "Welfare costs of the U.S. antidumping and countervailing duty laws," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 211-244, December.
  46. Xiangming Li, 2004. "Trade Liberalization and Real Exchange Rate Movement," IMF Staff Papers, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 51(3), pages 553-584, November.
  47. Bruce A. Blonigen & Chad P. Bown, 2001. "Antidumping and Retaliation Threats," NBER Working Papers 8576, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  48. Kara Reynolds, 2006. "Dumping on U.S. Farmers: Are There Biases in Global Antidumping Regulations?," Working Papers 2006-03, American University, Department of Economics.
  49. Bown, Chad P., 2005. "Global antidumping database version 1.0," Policy Research Working Paper Series 3737, The World Bank.
  50. Anderson, James E, 1979. "A Theoretical Foundation for the Gravity Equation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 69(1), pages 106-16, March.
  51. Blonigen, Bruce A. & Ohno, Yuka, 1998. "Endogenous protection, foreign direct investment and protection-building trade," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 46(2), pages 205-227, December.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ulb:ulbeco:2013/136355. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Benoit Pauwels)

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.